Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Joseph Smith and Multiple Mortal Probations


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Glenn101 said:

That is not a question I have to ask myself. I know that we are told to read, study, ponder and pray. I am pretty sure that many of the apostles have had revelations that they are not revealing (and are not supposed to reveal) to others. I am not buying into multiple mortal probations for several reasons. It does not follow from our present scriptures.

Glenn

You are welcome to share why you feel it does not follow our present scriptures if you'd like. Otherwise, respectfully, "Nope" is essentially what you've been saying. 

Here are some other questions:

Did Jesus Christ save Himself by His own grace, or did another(s) grace come in to play at some point?

D&C 93:13 And he received not of the fulness at first, but continued from grace to grace, until he received a fulness;

Was He perfect throughout that journey?

Was Jesus born perfect? Did He ever commit any errors? If not, how does that work exactly?

If He did commit sins at some point during His progression, by whose grace was He saved?

Who saved the Father, or did he save himself too?

Is there one path to godhood or two .. or more? I

 

Edited by Alaris
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Glenn101 said:

That is not a question I have to ask myself. I know that we are told to read, study, ponder and pray. I am pretty sure that many of the apostles have had revelations that they are not revealing (and are not supposed to reveal) to others. I am not buying into multiple mortal probations for several reasons. It does not follow from our present scriptures.

Glenn

I so appreciate your honesty in this post and how you feel.  I have not participated much in this thread..but trying to keep up on reading it.  I am surprised at the different interpretations of said probation within the mormon community here.  I do admire that you know your scriptures and believe them..not just in thought..but deed.

Link to comment
47 minutes ago, rchorse said:

How do sealings fit into the whole idea of MMP? Wouldn't MMP effectively make the doctrine of eternal families meaningless, since you would have a different family each time around?

Not necessarily.  Just as current ideas are that every time God creates a new world his kingdoms and glories increase with his posterity, the same would apply for us.

Christ inherited us through his sacrifice.  If as Joseph suggested the Father was a Savior on a previous earth then he would have inherited the  people of that earth into his kingdom and we know that he has already created worlds without number.

Ever increasing families hardly make the current ones meaningless and certainly does nothing to end any eternal connections already in place.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Not necessarily.  Just as current ideas are that every time God creates a new world his kingdoms and glories increase with his posterity, the same would apply for us.

Christ inherited us through his sacrifice.  If as Joseph suggested the Father was a Savior on a previous earth then he would have inherited the  people of that earth into his kingdom and we know that he has already created worlds without number.

Ever increasing families hardly make the current ones meaningless and certainly does nothing to end any eternal connections already in place.

MMP makes sealing more important, not less. Hypothetically, if my entire family inherited celestial glory except for one who receives terrestrial glory, then how does sealing  help that terrestrial soul?

We are sealed to Christ--and where does He go? He becomes a Father while the Father moves on to a higher exaltation. Then what does the new Father (Christ) do? He does the work of Elohim and chooses His firstborn. Those families who were sealed are now the sons of morning and noble and great ones of this new eternal round. Does a Father have one Son? Is there always one eternal round that is created from a prior eternal round, or are the creations ever expanding in a one to many relationship? I believe it is the latter, and here sealing seems to be even more important as we progress together. If the Lord Jesus Christ chooses 2, or 3, or 4 Firstborn to be the Gods of their own creations in their own space, then how do we guarantee we stay with our families? Do the terrestrial / telestial souls benefit from this sealing or are they forever stuck?

Moses 1:33 And worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; and by the Son I created them, which is mine Only Begotten.

34 And the first man of all men have I called Adam, which is many.

Before you (not you JHLPROF but those who haven't planted the mmp seed) cast this aside, these truths are all hiding in plain sight in our scriptures:

Mosiah 5:7 And now, because of the covenant which ye have made ye shall be called the children of Christ, his sons, and his daughters; for behold, this day he hath spiritually begotten you; for ye say that your hearts are changed through faith on his name; therefore, ye are born of him and have become his sons and his daughters.

Why else would it be important to spiritually become sons and daughters to Christ if He were simply our elder brother from our same eternal round and He were not going on to be the Father of new creations and eternal rounds? This is the church of the firstborn.

D&C 88:3 Wherefore, I now send upon you another Comforter, even upon you my friends, that it may abide in your hearts, even the Holy Spirit of promise; which other Comforter is the same that I promised unto my disciples, as is recorded in the testimony of John.

This Comforter is the promise which I give unto you of eternal life, even the glory of the celestial kingdom;

Which glory is that of the church of the Firstborn, even of God, the holiest of all, through Jesus Christ his Son—

He that ascended up on high, as also he descended below all things, in that he comprehended all things, that he might be in all and through all things, the light of truth;

Which truth shineth. This is the light of Christ. As also he is in the sun, and the light of the sun, and the power thereof by which it was made.

As also he is in the moon, and is the light of the moon, and the power thereof by which it was made;

As also the light of the stars, and the power thereof by which they were made;

10 And the earth also, and the power thereof, even the earth upon which you stand.

11 And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings;

12 Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space—

13 The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things.

Notice how verses 4 and 5 are equating celestial glory with the church of the Firstborn. What is a church but a vehicle that takes people to a higher level? What is the end of that vehicle? Firstborn. 

Edited by Alaris
Link to comment
7 hours ago, Alaris said:

You are welcome to share why you feel it does not follow our present scriptures if you'd like. Otherwise, respectfully, "Nope" is essentially what you've been saying. 

 

D&C 132:29 Abraham received all things, whatsoever he received, by revelation and commandment, by my word, saith the Lord, and hath entered into his exaltation and sitteth upon his throne.

Alma 11:45 Now, behold, I have spoken unto you concerning the death of the mortal body, and also concerning the resurrection of the mortal body. I say unto you that this mortal body is raised to an immortal body, that is from death, even from the first death unto life, that they can die no more; their spirits uniting with their bodies, never to be divided; thus the whole becoming spiritual and immortal, that they can no more see corruption.


Helaman 3:
27 Thus we may see that the Lord is merciful unto all who will, in the sincerity of their hearts, call upon his holy name.
28 Yea, thus we see that the gate of heaven is open unto all, even to those who will believe on the name of Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God.
29 Yea, we see that whosoever will may lay hold upon the word of God, which is quick and powerful, which shall divide asunder all the cunning and the snares and the wiles of the devil, and lead the man of Christ in a strait and narrow course across that everlasting gulf of misery which is prepared to engulf the wicked—
30 And land their souls, yea, their immortal souls, at the right hand of God in the kingdom of heaven, to sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and with Jacob, and with all our holy fathers, to go no more out.

Those should suffice as prima facie scriptural evidence that immortal means just that. If a person becomes immortal upon resurrection, a second mortal probation would be impossible.

7 hours ago, Alaris said:

Did Jesus Christ save Himself by His own grace, or did another(s) grace come in to play at some point?

John 10:
17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

7 hours ago, Alaris said:

Was Jesus born perfect?

You have answered that question with your own scripture.  (D&C 93:13 And he received not of the fulness at first, but continued from grace to grace, until he received a fulness;)

I don't know but what He was not perfect until He had completed His mission of atonement and redemption. 

7 hours ago, Alaris said:

Did He ever commit any errors? If not, how does that work exactly?

14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

8 hours ago, Alaris said:

If He did commit sins at some point during His progression, by whose grace was He saved?

N/A

8 hours ago, Alaris said:

Who saved the Father, or did he save himself too?

I don't know.

8 hours ago, Alaris said:

Is there one path to godhood or two .. or more? I

2 Nephi 33:9 I also have charity for the Gentiles. But behold, for none of these can I hope except they shall be reconciled unto Christ, and enter into the narrow gate, and walk in the strait path which leads to life, and continue in the path until the end of the day of probation.

Doctrine and Covenants 132:22 For strait is the gate, and narrow the way that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the lives, and few there be that find it, because ye receive me not in the world neither do ye know me. (See also Matthew 7:14 and 3 Nephi 14:14)

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Glenn

Link to comment

Thanks Glen for the substantive post. There's nothing in Alma 35:11 about the permanence of resurrection that didn't apply to Adam before he partook off the fruit of the tree of knowledge. In order for Adam to progress further, he needed descend again and ascend again according to the seventh promise in Revelation (see my seven levels thread.) 

The sixth promise in Revelation also speaks of going no more out...that term to go no more out strongly suggests there had previously been multiple goings out doesn't it? And what does go out mean? I personally believe it means go out from the presence of God as the patriarchs only maintain that connection when they descend. Here is the verse of the sixth promise :

Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

So, this promised reward includes the true name of the Father and the new name of the Son which doesn't confirm but certainly fits with my understanding... That they no longer leave the presence of the Father. The father was in a cloud in the presence of James and John because of their presence. Had it just been Peter and Jesus then there would have been no cloud. 

To go no more out. 

D&C 132 is about as an overt reference to mmp as there is as it speaks of the continuation of the lives plural and reading on into the next verse speaks of deaths plural. 

25 Broad is the gate, and wide the way that leadeth to the deaths; and many there are that go in thereat, because they receive me not, neither do they abide in my law.

The deaths. The lives. MMP. Simple. 

You've stated you don't know the answer to some of these questions. I certainly don't know all the answers either. However, I do know that MMP answers far more questions than it does flag inconsistencies. Moreover the seed I've planted Ala Alma 32 has born much fruit and is delicious to me. 

Edited by Alaris
Link to comment
14 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I am not so sure about MMP being something for the Church.  

I have come to feel that much revelation was never meant for the Church as a body and when we reach certain points in our lives we are required to come to our own understandings.  Joseph and Brigham expressed this feeling repeatedly.  

Adam-God is an example of Brigham doing this - he implied he should never have given it to the general membership, but that ir was revealed to him.  King Follett discourse teachings were another. And Joseph stated he held back many of his revelations from the Church.  There are many doctrinal truths that are not currently available in the Church.

I see no reason MMP cannot represent another deeper theological understanding only revealed in part and withheld from the Church body.  But I do think there us as much speculation as there is revelation on that topic.

The question we have to ask ourselves is whether God expects us to limit our personal study and theological understanding to that which has been revealed to the Church officially (borrowes light?) or continue to study, pray, and learn for ourselves.  Even if that means thinking and studying beyond "official" teachings.

I see Adam-God as a partial revelation to Brigham Young, that when properly interpreted with Bruce R. McConkie's interpretations for it, yields a greater truth (i.e. Adam-Senior/Adam Junior duality).  I don't think Brigham Young had it all figured out, and I think that those that have come to the Adam Junior/Adam Senior interpretation do have it figured out, because they realized that Brigham had roles and identities mixed up.  Therefore, I think similarly that MMP is a partially revealed thing that is wrong when you look at it through the lens of reincarnation.  I think that nobody is given another mortality to redo things over, and I think that if anything, people are put on probation both in Spirit Prison and after resurrection without dying a second time and being born a second time.  These are forbidden places to go in my mind to suggest that anyone can either fall from an exaltation and go into a second mortality, as in some flavors of Adam God theory, or to go to die and go into another mortality after resurrection.  These speculations are absurd to suggest that someone can fall from an eternal state and get another body through birth.  It doesn't work that way, period.  And if there are any kinds of probations after death, they are probations in the spirit world or in the resurrection.  They are not probations with a new birth.

I think that people need to separate the notion of probation from birth and mortality, and realize that a birth and a mortality is not required for a probation, but that people can be "thrown back to their native element" (i.e. cast into a hell) for a time, to be tested for a time without being mortal and without being born a second time.  It's simply not a requirement.  People have do-overs in whatever hell they need to go to, but there is no guarantee that they get exaltation once they come out of that hell.  As Elder Faust says, exaltation is a case-by-case basis, and only the Lord knows when someone has truly forfeited it.  A do-over doesn't mean someone can qualify for exaltation, but it doesn't mean they cannot either.  And it doesn't mean they need to be reborn in another body to do it either.  If there is such a thing as MMP, it is this type of thing, not a reincarnation.  And it strains logic that anyone should insist that a reincarnation must be a part of it.

Edited by EdGoble
Link to comment
5 hours ago, Alaris said:

Thanks Glen for the substantive post. There's nothing in Alma 35:11 about the permanence of resurrection that didn't apply to Adam before he partook off the fruit of the tree of knowledge. In order for Adam to progress further, he needed descend again and ascend again according to the seventh promise in Revelation (see my seven levels thread.) 

There is nowhere in the scriptures that says that Adam and Eve were immortal prior to partaking of that forbidden fruit. Immortal equals living forever no more to die as noted in the scriptures I quoted.

5 hours ago, Alaris said:

The sixth promise in Revelation also speaks of going no more out...that term to go no more out strongly suggests there had previously been multiple goings out doesn't it? And what does go out mean? I personally believe it means go out from the presence of God as the patriarchs only maintain that connection when they descend. Here is the verse of the sixth promise :

Or it can mean the original going out when we left His presence to begin our mortal journey. When viewed in the context of the scriptures on immortality, it would seem to be a better interpretation.

5 hours ago, Alaris said:

The deaths. The lives. MMP. Simple

One person equal one death. Two or more, deaths. Also physical death and spiritual death equal deaths. Just different ways to look at the same thing.

I have seen no scriptural support for a person to lay down a body after its resurrection but have seen scriptural support for immortality of the body after resurrection as in "can die no more." That one is hard to get around.

I have also seen no scriptural support for a person after death starting all over again, i.e. being born again in the flesh.

Glenn

Link to comment
On 3/19/2018 at 4:25 AM, Glenn101 said:

There is nowhere in the scriptures that says that Adam and Eve were immortal prior to partaking of that forbidden fruit. Immortal equals living forever no more to die as noted in the scriptures I quoted.

The original post in this thread provides an excellent overview of MMP in the early church, though I personally disagree that Joseph Smith's early statements about the transmigration of souls wasn't anything other than denouncing a specific doctrine preached by a specific person that includes the spirits of the fathers inhabiting the same bodies as their sons--multiple spirits in one body.

Too many LDS throw out the baby with the bathwater in Brigham Young's teachings. Many of his statements support MMP. 

As for your comment that the scriptures do not say Adam and Even were immortal - why would they say they would become mortal after partaking of the fruit? What were they if they weren't immortal?

Moses 4:8 And the woman said unto the serpent: We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden;

But of the fruit of the tree which thou beholdest in the midst of the garden, God hath said—Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

If you're saying the word "Immortal" doesn't appear in the scriptures perhaps you can offer an alternative explanation to the word:

2 Nephi 2:22 And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end.

2 Nephi 2:22 is a pretty good definition of Immortal. Here is Brigham Young's teaching that should not be looped in with the false doctrine that has been labeled "Adam - God." This quote supports this idea of one path to Godhood that would require at the very least two mortal probations - three if Adam is a step, which I believe it is. This does not make Adam = Elohim or Adam > Jesus as the fundamentalists believe.

"Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is Michael, the Archangel, the Ancient of Days! about whom holy men have written and spoken—He is our Father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do." - Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v. 1, p. 51

So either this was a teaching of Brigham Young, or it wasn't. He was mistaken ... or he wasn't. And if he wasn't, then those who have taken this quote and twisted it are yet another example of how the Devil opposes truth--where he fights the hardest is a mirror to what is truly important to God and his work.

Here is a bit more from the quote that gives a proper context:

They came here, organized the raw material, and arranged in their order the herbs of the field, the trees, the apple, the peach, the plum, the pear, and every other fruit that is desirable and good for man; the seed was brought from another sphere, and planted in this earth. The thistle, the thorn, the brier, and the obnoxious weed did not appear until after the earth was cursed. When Adam and Eve had eaten of the forbidden fruit, their bodies became mortal from its effects, and therefore their offspring were mortal. When the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. And who is the Father? He is the first of the human family; and when he took a tabernacle, it was begotten by his Father in heaven, after the same manner as the tabernacles of Cain, Abel, and the rest of the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve; from the fruits of the earth, the first earthly tabernacles were originated by the Father, and so on in succession. I could tell you much more about this; but were I to tell you the whole truth, blasphemy would be nothing to it, in the estimation of the superstitious and overrighteous of mankind. However, I have told you the truth as far as I have gone. I have heard men preach upon the divinity of Christ, and exhaust all the wisdom they possessed. All Scripturalists, and approved theologians who were considered exemplary for piety and education, have undertaken to expound on this subject, in every age of the Christian era; and after they have done all, they are obliged to conclude by exclaiming “great is the mystery of godliness,” and tell nothing. 

It is true that the earth was organized by three distinct characters, namely, Eloheim, Yahovah, and Michael, these three forming a quorum, as in all heavenly bodies, and in organizing element, perfectly represented in the Deity, as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost."  - Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v. 1, p. 51

This aught to rub any fundamentalists raw, but this is the proper interpretation: (I love the bit about the over-righteous, though I'm certainly looping you in with that Glenn101, though I certainly have run into the overrighteous (lol) elsewhere discussing this topic.)

Michael = Holy Ghost. Dominion = Our world, our God, and the only God with whom we have anything to do.

Jehovah = The Son of God. Dominion = Worlds.

Elohim (means Gods plural by the way) = The Father. Dominion = Creations.

The only error Brigham Young made here--and it isn't even an error--but in hindsight I'm certain he would have added this additional point of clarity. When he said "he is the first of the human family" he is speaking of the pattern of Adams and how Adam's father is Elohim. Given that context, everything else makes sense. In fact, that context can easily be derived in the following paragraph where he equates Michael to the Holy Ghost. Ever notice how the Holy Ghost is conspicuously absent from the temple endowment? Well, in my very humble opinion, Michael, Peter, James, and John all have something to do with a full understanding of the Holy Ghost and becoming a God.

Here is the next bit that gives even more context. I have left nothing out from these JD quotes - you can put them back together as one long quote:

"Again, they will try to tell how the divinity of Jesus is joined to his humanity, and exhaust all their mental faculties, and wind up with this profound language, as describing the soul of man, “it is an immaterial substance!” What a learned idea! Jesus, our elder brother, was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in Heaven. Now, let all who may hear these doctrines, pause before they make light of them, or treat them with indifference, for they will prove their salvation or damnation.

I have given you a few leading items upon this subject, but a great deal more remains to be told. Now, remember from this time forth, and forever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost."  Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v. 1, p. 51

Again, I'm sure Brother Brigham would have added some more clarity here given what so many have done to this quote. "the same character that was in the Garden of Eden" is Elohim, not Adam. Was Elohim not in the garden of Eden? Is Adam not also our Father - of our flesh? In the full context of this quote, Brigham Young equated Michael to the Holy Ghost and said explicitly that Jesus was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. Adam is not the Father of the Holy Ghost. What Brigham Young was attempting to teach here was MMP. That is the only explanation as to how Michael walked into the Garden of Eden with a celestial body. (MMP also explains how the fallen angels reproduced with the daughters of men, creating the Nephilim. This is in the Bible and is explained further in 1 Enoch.)

Brigham Young equates Michael to our God and the only God we have anything to do. Then he equates him to the Holy Ghost - whoops fundamentalists. Is the Holy Ghost not a God? Did he not earn that right just as Jesus earned His spot? This world is Adam's world and we LDS already believe he is the principal priesthood authority. The two commands (separate thread here) represent the fact he could have kept his inheritance and his station forever, or he could consecrate his body, his world, and his inheritance to the progression of souls of mankind. Both were commandments. In order to obey the latter, he had to fall. 

How Michael and Jehovah earn those roles is what is being explained here. Michael had already been resurrected at least once and would have remained in that state forever - you may call that immortality or you may call it not dying at all ever - forever ever - an unchanging state until he partakes of the fruit. We partake of the flesh and body of Christ at the onset of every week which symbolizes the first day of a new creation. It is the power of the Lord Jesus Christ that allows us to continue to perfect ourselves and that symbol is right there in front of all of us and there is likely less than 1 percent who understand that the sacrament symbolizes MMP.  This is also why when Michael arises in the temple, the men are asked to do the same. This is the heavenly pattern. Here is that quote from 1 Enoch again:

 Enoch 62:14 And the Lord of Spirits will abide over them, And with that Son of Man shall they eat 
And lie down and rise up forever and ever

Adam is our God because he is the level of the Holy Ghost. 1 Enoch refers to the archangels as "The Holy Ones" - each of them preside over a church, or congregation of souls - but I'm digressing to the seven levels of mankind here (separate thread here.)

On 3/19/2018 at 4:25 AM, Glenn101 said:

Or it can mean the original going out when we left His presence to begin our mortal journey. When viewed in the context of the scriptures on immortality, it would seem to be a better interpretation.

Sure it could mean that. But I am reminded of how the evangelicals look at Faith and Works - that mighty debate they all can't seem to agree upon. Why do they struggle? Because so many want to believe that their works are meaningless because the inverse idea makes them quake. We LDS do the same. We want to pick and choose the scriptures and sacrifice some so that our understanding may remain comfortable just like the evangelicals. It's not Faith or Works - it's both. It's not MMP or Immortality - it's both.

On 3/19/2018 at 4:25 AM, Glenn101 said:

One person equal one death. Two or more, deaths. Also physical death and spiritual death equal deaths. Just different ways to look at the same thing.

I have seen no scriptural support for a person to lay down a body after its resurrection but have seen scriptural support for immortality of the body after resurrection as in "can die no more." That one is hard to get around.

I have also seen no scriptural support for a person after death starting all over again, i.e. being born again in the flesh.

Glenn

Again, the simple language of D&C 132 would say "death" if it were one death applying to many. 

D&C 132: 22 For strait is the gate, and narrow the way that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the lives, and few there be that find it, because ye receive me not in the world neither do ye know me.

23 But if ye receive me in the world, then shall ye know me, and shall receive your exaltation; that where I am ye shall be also.

24 This is eternal lives—to know the only wise and true God, and Jesus Christ, whom he hath sent. I am he. Receive ye, therefore, my law.

25 Broad is the gate, and wide the way that leadeth to the deaths; and many there are that go in thereat, because they receive me not, neither do they abide in my law.

Replace the plural forms with the singular and that would be the correct way to represent one person equals one death. The word "continuation" would also be absent with that understanding. "The continuation of the lives" is a poor word choice to represent offspring. 

I will concede this - the Lord all but spells out MMP in the scriptures. It's not spelled out explicitly. However, the Lord all but spells out MMP in the scriptures! Why? This is the time of the gentiles - the time of milk. The meaty truths are learned in the temple but are not preached at the pulpit. I believe this time is coming to an end. Consider how many LDS believe MMP for the same reasons I do. Once we give space and plant the seed it takes fruit and we can see clearly how and why the Lord all but spells out MMP. This truth is not for those who are not ready for it - those who personally don't like the idea of experiencing another mortality. And you know what? I believe we are given that choice. Continue? Yes or No. Those who say yes are those to whom are referenced that every knee shall bow. Would God who has always respected agency ever force anyone to bow? Nope. Those to whom "the continuation of the lives" includes are those who will bow and spiritually become begotten sons and daughters to Christ as He moves on to the next exaltation and we become His Israel - some of us again moving to a higher capacity (King Follet) - and some of us for the first time (Dispensation of Moses imho.)

Anyway, the King Follet sermon along spells out there is one path to Godhood - that God the Father was once like us and was also once a Savior. That's two mortalities by simple logic. You can take that thought and plant it, or you can toss it aside and continue to be comfortable in your beliefs.

 

 

Edited by Alaris
typos, etc.
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Alaris said:

Anyway, the King Follet sermon along spells out there is one path to Godhood - that God the Father was once like us and was also once a Savior. That's two mortalities by simple logic. You can take that thought and plant it, or you can toss it aside and continue to be comfortable in your beliefs.

Alaris, I have already pointed out in the scriptures why Adam was not immortal in the Garden of Eden. According to the scriptures once a person is resurrected they can not die anymore. Adam (and Eve and all of the rest of creation) was unmortal at the time, but that was taken away when he partook of the forbidden fruit.

As for Brigham Young's statements, you have missed previous discussions on the reliability of the Journal of Discourses. I suggest that you read up on the research by LaJean Purcell Carruth on George D. Watt and the production of the Journal of Discourses. I would not hang my doctrinal hat on anything that can be found therein.

Glenn

Link to comment
58 minutes ago, Glenn101 said:

Alaris, I have already pointed out in the scriptures why Adam was not immortal in the Garden of Eden. According to the scriptures once a person is resurrected they can not die anymore. Adam (and Eve and all of the rest of creation) was unmortal at the time, but that was taken away when he partook of the forbidden fruit.

As for Brigham Young's statements, you have missed previous discussions on the reliability of the Journal of Discourses. I suggest that you read up on the research by LaJean Purcell Carruth on George D. Watt and the production of the Journal of Discourses. I would not hang my doctrinal hat on anything that can be found therein.

Glenn

Unmortal - Ahhhhh now I understand. It's all coming together now ... Unmortal + Brigham Young's teachings thrown out.

(Disclaimer: Tone is difficult to convey. Please read the above with charming, friendly sarcasm. /sarcasm over)

Do we throw out King Follet, D&C 93, D&C 132, Joseph Smith's quotes about the Holy Ghost, Revelation scriptures about becoming a God through this one path, etc. etc.? You've discounted or outright discarded all of these in turn and even made up a new word to not see this truth.

With respect Glenn101, if you can forgive my jest above, did you even read or consider what I wrote about the JD? I destroyed the fundamentalist twist and showed how it demonstrates eternal progression and how it suggests MMP as well. What do you think is sealed? We know why it's sealed--we've discussed that earlier. Faithlessness.

We also know from the scriptures that Ephraim is blind (Isaiah 28) the watchmen are blind (Isaiah 56) and there is a sentiment of "we have enough" that even the saints struggle with (2 Nephi 28-29) and we know what happens to those who say "we have enough" - Alma 12:10-11.

Now, I'm not trying to convince you of MMP Glenn101. I'm trying to persuade you as to why so many LDS believe it and demonstrate from scripture and from prophetic statements as to the fact it was clearly taught in the early church. Have you read the original post in this thread? It's excellent, by the way.  It is better to be believing than unbelieving - it is better to look for and seek truth rather than close yourself off with settling on what isn't possible or what cannot be--or even what you refuse to see.

Link to comment
On 3/20/2018 at 5:50 PM, Alaris said:

Now, I'm not trying to convince you of MMP Glenn101. I'm trying to persuade you as to why so many LDS believe it and demonstrate from scripture and from prophetic statements as to the fact it was clearly taught in the early church. Have you read the original post in this thread? It's excellent, by the way.  It is better to be believing than unbelieving - it is better to look for and seek truth rather than close yourself off with settling on what isn't possible or what cannot be--or even what you refuse to see.

   If MMP were actually to be I believe that the Christ's words to his apostles is pertinent. "In my Father's House are many mansions. If it were not so, I would have told you." To me, there is a corollary to that. If MMP was a correct doctrine, I would have told you." It does not follow according to my reading of the scriptures. Obviously you have a different perspective. I will exit with that.

Glenn

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Glenn101 said:

   If MMP were actually to be I believe that the Christ's words to his apostles is pertinent. "In my Father's House are many mansions. If it were not so, I would have told you." To me, there is a corollary to that. If MMP was a correct doctrine, I would have told you." It does not follow according to my reading of the scriptures. Obviously you have a different perspective. I will exit with that.

Glenn

Thanks Glenn for the stimulating discussion. Your exiting remark presumes not only the scriptures have every truth therein already but your understanding of them is completely in tune. I certainly don't suggest either of those conclusions myself.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Alaris said:

Thanks Glenn for the stimulating discussion. Your exiting remark presumes not only the scriptures have every truth therein already but your understanding of them is completely in tune. I certainly don't suggest either of those conclusions myself.

(Okay, back on stage briefly.) I am not suggesting that the scriptures have every truth therein. I do believe that the extant ones have everything we need to attain redemption, forgiveness, and exaltation. Nor do I believe that I am fully in tune with everything our scriptures say. I am just not worried about every wind of doctrine that may be blown about here and there. I believe in the more sure word of prophecy and believe that our current prophet is the conduit by which such prophecy will come. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Glenn101 said:

(Okay, back on stage briefly.) I am not suggesting that the scriptures have every truth therein. I do believe that the extant ones have everything we need to attain redemption, forgiveness, and exaltation. Nor do I believe that I am fully in tune with everything our scriptures say. I am just not worried about every wind of doctrine that may be blown about here and there. I believe in the more sure word of prophecy and believe that our current prophet is the conduit by which such prophecy will come. 

That is a great segue to speak about the Davidic Servant, but I do not want to hijack this thread. Isaiah 28 is a great read the may give you some context as to the state of Ephraim when he arrives on the scene. 

Oil in your own lamp will be required at some point. As nice as it would be to have President Nelson introduce the two witnesses in general conference, you'll need to come up with a truth discovery mechanism on your own that does not rely on someone else solely. 

Step 1 on the truth mechanism is ask, seek, knock. Be believing. Unbelief is a far greater obstacle than belief. The believing man is seeking after all. 

These truths may very well be part of the sifting of wheat from chaff, and those with oil from those without. 

Thanks again for the discussion. 

 

D&C 90:24 Search diligently, pray always, and be believing, and all things shall work together for your good, if ye walk uprightly and remember the covenantwherewith ye have covenanted one with another.

1 Nephi 10:19 For he that diligently seeketh shall find; and the mysteries of God shall be unfolded unto them, by the power of the Holy Ghost, as well in these times as in times of old, and as well in times of old as in times to come; wherefore, the course of the Lord is one eternal round.

Edited by Alaris
Link to comment
  • 1 year later...
On 2/28/2017 at 10:07 AM, stemelbow said:

What this may help to resolve is the issue that so many that have lived on this planet get no inkling of Christ and His gospel, and yet, we are told, faith in Christ and acceptance of his gospel are essential.  If mortal probations, then individuals get better opportunity.  As it is now, one could easily conclude God respects persons, because some of us clearly get benefits others never had. 

The Book of Mormon resolves this issue.   The atonement covers for all contingencies:
 

"Wherefore, he has given a law; and where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation; and where there is no condemnation the mercies of the Holy One of Israel have claim upon them, because of the atonement; for they are delivered by the power of him.  For the atonement satisfieth the demands of his justice upon all those who have not the law given to them, that they are delivered from that awful monster, death and hell, and the devil, and the lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment; and they are restored to that God who gave them breath, which is the Holy One of Israel"  (2 Nephi 9).

For behold, and also his blood atoneth for the sins of those who have fallen by the transgression of Adam, who have died not knowing the will of God concerning them, or who have ignorantly sinned.  But wo, wo unto him who knoweth that he rebelleth against God! For salvation cometh to none such except it be through repentance and faith on the Lord Jesus Christ."  (Mosiah 3)

The atonement also negates the need for proxy baptism, or baptism for the dead.   LDS theology rejects the Atonement, not in word, but in deed.  It doesn't believe Christ actually has the power to save and that man somehow has to perform "proxy ordinances" to the help the "progress."

Link to comment

In a Multiple Mortal Probation scenario, what is the purpose of Jesus Christ and the Atonement?  We do we need a redeemer and a Savior if we just repeat this process 2, 10, or 1,000 times?   This concept of MMP is a cancer that has infected Mormonism.  It should be rejected out of hand and cast into the fire.   It doesn't matter Joseph Smith said, or is said to have said, or claimed to have said, or what is attributed to him.  Joseph Smith doesn't supersede the Book of Mormon.

According to Alma:

"And we see that death comes upon mankind, yea, the death which has been spoken of by Amulek, which is the temporal death; nevertheless there was a space granted unto man in which he might repent; therefore this life became a probationary state; a time to prepare to meet God; a time to prepare for that endless state which has been spoken of by us, which is after the resurrection of the dead."  (Alma 12)

"For behold, this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God; yea, behold the day of this life is the day for men to perform their labors.  And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed.  Ye cannot say, when ye are brought to that awful crisis, that I will repent, that I will return to my God. Nay, ye cannot say this; for that same spirit which doth possess your bodies at the time that ye go out of this life, that same spirit will have power to possess your body in that eternal world."  (Alma 34)

"And then shall it come to pass, that the spirits of those who are righteous are received into a state of happiness, which is calledparadise, a state of rest, a state of peace, where they shall rest from all their troubles and from all care, and sorrow.  And then shall it come to pass, that the spirits of the wicked, yea, who are evil—for behold, they have no part nor portion of the Spirit of the Lord; for behold, they chose evil works rather than good; therefore the spirit of the bdevil did enter into them, and take possession of their house—and these shall be cast out into outer darkness; there shall be weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth, and this because of their own iniquity, being led captive by the will of the devil.  Now this is the state of the souls of the wicked, yea, in darkness, and a state of awful, fearful looking for the fiery indignation of the wrath of God upon them; thus they remain in this state, as well as the righteous in paradise, until the time of their resurrection."  (Alma 40)

If it's not clear from these passages...I don't know what else to say.

 

Link to comment
25 minutes ago, Matt Lohrke said:

The Book of Mormon resolves this issue.   The atonement covers for all contingencies:
 

"Wherefore, he has given a law; and where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation; and where there is no condemnation the mercies of the Holy One of Israel have claim upon them, because of the atonement; for they are delivered by the power of him.  For the atonement satisfieth the demands of his justice upon all those who have not the law given to them, that they are delivered from that awful monster, death and hell, and the devil, and the lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment; and they are restored to that God who gave them breath, which is the Holy One of Israel"  (2 Nephi 9).

For behold, and also his blood atoneth for the sins of those who have fallen by the transgression of Adam, who have died not knowing the will of God concerning them, or who have ignorantly sinned.  But wo, wo unto him who knoweth that he rebelleth against God! For salvation cometh to none such except it be through repentance and faith on the Lord Jesus Christ."  (Mosiah 3)

The atonement also negates the need for proxy baptism, or baptism for the dead.   LDS theology rejects the Atonement, not in word, but in deed.  It doesn't believe Christ actually has the power to save and that man somehow has to perform "proxy ordinances" to the help the "progress."

So, what branch of Latter-day Saintism do you belong to?

You uphold the authority of Joseph Smith in the translation of the BOM but dismiss his revelations in the D&C about proxy baptism?

Link to comment
On 3/1/2017 at 8:01 PM, VideoGameJunkie said:

Multiple probations is honestly my idea of hell. 

That was my mother's view, asking the question:  "What would be a perfect hell or eternal damnation".  Her answer:  "to have to begin over and over again" . . . kind of like Sysyphus.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Matt Lohrke said:

The Book of Mormon resolves this issue.   The atonement covers for all contingencies:
 

"Wherefore, he has given a law; and where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation; and where there is no condemnation the mercies of the Holy One of Israel have claim upon them, because of the atonement; for they are delivered by the power of him.  For the atonement satisfieth the demands of his justice upon all those who have not the law given to them, that they are delivered from that awful monster, death and hell, and the devil, and the lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment; and they are restored to that God who gave them breath, which is the Holy One of Israel"  (2 Nephi 9).

For behold, and also his blood atoneth for the sins of those who have fallen by the transgression of Adam, who have died not knowing the will of God concerning them, or who have ignorantly sinned.  But wo, wo unto him who knoweth that he rebelleth against God! For salvation cometh to none such except it be through repentance and faith on the Lord Jesus Christ."  (Mosiah 3)

The atonement also negates the need for proxy baptism, or baptism for the dead.   LDS theology rejects the Atonement, not in word, but in deed.  It doesn't believe Christ actually has the power to save and that man somehow has to perform "proxy ordinances" to the help the "progress."

The passages you reference are focused on the idea that people who do not have the opportunity to follow God's law are forgiven of their sins, absolved from punishment. They are not accountable before God for they did not know him. You then proceed to imply that this renders baptism for the dead unnecessary, and accuse our theology of denying the Atonement in deed. If the only purpose of baptism was the remission of sins, you might be right, but remission of sins is not the only purpose of baptism. Indeed, the Lord has commanded it for all men, and led the way Himself. 

"And now, if the Lamb of God, he being holy, should have need to be baptized by water, to fulfill all righteousness, O then , how much more need have we, being unholy, to be baptized, yea, even by water!" - 2 Nephi 31:5

If the Lord Himself, sinless as He is, the very Instrument of perfection unto us all, must be baptized, then it can be safely concluded that baptism concerns more than just the remission of sins which Jacob and Benjamin address.

We in no way deny that Christ has power to save. What we do teach, however, is that baptism is a covenant, a promise, that must be entered into freely. Christ can't make that choice for us. That promise is essential to eternal progression, which goes beyond being saved from hell. We know Christ will do that in the end (D&C 76) for just about everybody. His power to save is in fact exalted in Restored Church theology. However, if we want to advance further, that requires making covenants with God, sealed by ordinances. 

 

Link to comment
On 3/20/2018 at 2:42 PM, Glenn101 said:

 As for Brigham Young's statements, you have missed previous discussions on the reliability of the Journal of Discourses. I suggest that you read up on the research by LaJean Purcell Carruth on George D. Watt and the production of the Journal of Discourses. I would not hang my doctrinal hat on anything that can be found therein.

Glenn

Not to drag out this thread necromancy but I attended LaJean's presentation at the MHA this year.  She spoke about Watt and the things he changed in the JoD and how we view Brigham as a result.

She also categorically stated that yes, Brigham taught Adam-God in the original unedited transcripts, not just in Watt's edits.  So perhaps we can put the false "misqouted" argument to bed now.

Link to comment
13 hours ago, Matt Lohrke said:

It doesn't matter Joseph Smith said, or is said to have said, or claimed to have said, or what is attributed to him.  Joseph Smith doesn't supersede the Book of Mormon.

Well, well, well, a solo scriptura Mormon.  That's a new variation I don't think I've come across before.

Scripture is the recorded inspired  teachings of prophets.  An inspired teaching by Joseph or Brigham or any other prophet is as valid as scripture as anything in the Bible or Book of Mormon.  Peter, Paul, Mosiah, Alma do not get priority for their inspired teachings over the inspired teachings of Joseph, Brigham, Wilford, or Spencer.

Link to comment
13 hours ago, blarsen said:

That was my mother's view, asking the question:  "What would be a perfect hell or eternal damnation".  Her answer:  "to have to begin over and over again" . . . kind of like Sysyphus.

I wouldn't want to have sysyphus more than once... if ever at all...

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...